Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good morning to all of you. Thank you for coming.
First, I want to say that the global crisis of refugees is really an indictment to the whole world, and it's a tragedy. I think Canadians acknowledge and accept their role in helping resolve this issue. I don't think they see it as an exercise in feeling good. It's a recognition of the importance of affording or providing refuge for people who are genuinely seeking help from persecution and looking for an opportunity to start a life.
There's no doubt that there are a lot of tragic cases and examples. It's always very difficult when you're dealing with the human dimension to try to be pragmatic. It's very difficult. You try, as government, as parliamentarians, as judges, as lawyers, to work with the human dimension, at the same time trying to be practical and pragmatic.
I accept a lot of the points you're raising, and we're trying to distill this issue. There were reasons for signing that agreement. There was some logic, but now we're hearing your feedback, and you are highlighting some flaws.
This is a very difficult thing for us to try to deal with, if I may speak on behalf of the committee. I'm trying to understand. First we learned there was a reduction of 55% of claimants in 2005, I think, after the agreement was signed.
Professor Anker, what do you think? Is that because of the agreement, or were there other reasons for the significant reduction in applicants?